Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
49
GPT-5.4 Pro
91
Pick GPT-5.4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Multimodal
+20.8 difference
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
GPT-5.4 Pro
$0.25 / $1.5
$30 / $180
205 t/s
74 t/s
7.50s
151.79s
1M
1.05M
Pick GPT-5.4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
GPT-5.4 Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 91 to 49. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4 Pro's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 94 against 73.2.
GPT-5.4 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $30.00 input / $180.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.25 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite. That is roughly 120.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 Pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite.
GPT-5.4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 91 to 49.
GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 94 versus 73.2. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.